| May. 5th, 2008 @ 03:43 pm PORN. (Well, not really.) |
|---|
Current Mood:  sick
Current Music: Therion - Call of Dagon
First of all, I have to say that infected lymph nodes are one of the most uncomfortable, awful things that can happen to you on a Friday night. I'm still out sick, because they're trying to drill through the right side of my neck and escape. Personally, I'd rather be back at work than sitting here in misery, but John keeps saying things like "lymphoma" and "infections" and "immune system" and pushing me back into bed.
Speaking of John, we had a not-quite-an-argument, more of a scholarly-discussion-with-loud-disagreements, the other night. Basically, I was going through my list of materials, and I remarked in an offhand that the next one I had chronologically was one of those "adult" versions. And whoosh, like a volcano erupting, there came heated discussion.
Basically, John thinks I should omit the adult versions, while I think I should include them. We both had good arguments: John said that pornographic versions of the story were hardly mainstream or relevant, while I said that they were probably just as widely viewed as any of the traditional versions of the story. John said that including adult films with no guarantee of a literary basis would damage my academic credibility; I said that NOT including them out of a misguided sense of propriety would damage my academic credibility. He said that the vast majority of adult films barely have plots at all, and that it wouldn't be worthwhile for me to sit through them all when they were likely to follow no particular patterns; I said that I wouldn't know that unless I analyzed them, and that even if they were pretty plot-less, I would need to include the reasons behind that in my final analysis (since I'm supposed to be looking at the ways stories are changed in modern contexts, and the cultural reasons behind those changes). He said that nobody could possibly respect a literary paper that included adult films in its sources, and that it would bar my findings and website from enjoying as large a circulation as they otherwise might; I said that I wasn't going to be writing anything x-rated in the project, and that I didn't see why it couldn't be taken seriously in a scholarly context. He said I was a stubborn wench. I said he was pig-headed. And so on, and so forth.
So, in all seriousness, who out there has an opinion? Hit me with it. I obviously have my own, but I need more input here, and you guys have proven to have leveler heads than me some days (and those are days that I'm not sick as a dog and doped up like there's no tomorrow). Is this something that should be included in the main body of work? In a sub-section (which is my vote)? Or left out entirely? |
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
silent_lorelei's journal
blah
